Path to the draft....trades, rumors, etc

football karma

Happy in the pretense of knowledge
Joined
Jul 22, 2002
Posts
14,739
Reaction score
12,872
this is likely nothing....


but in the span of a few days, two people connected with the Cardinals have said the words "inside linebacker" when discussing the draft

first was Stu Grigson, head of player personnel on the Big Red Rage. In fairness to Stu, he as responding to a hypothetical question on ranking players -- but the first position he talked about was...... inside linebacker

now, Cards put the below out there......


xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,031
Reaction score
37,086
Location
UK

This is really going to hurt the "You have to draft a 1st or 2nd round running back to have a shot at a great one" crowd.

"We know that investing in better linemen with ability to run block (as well as pass block) and a play caller who knows when to call run plays (situations that are more likely to deliver success) and how to deploy personnel (to dictate box count) will see substantially more success than a strong individual RB with poor run blocking and inefficient play calling."
 
Last edited:

Solar7

Go Suns
Joined
May 18, 2002
Posts
10,973
Reaction score
11,582
Location
Las Vegas, NV
This is really going to hurt the "You have to draft a 1st or 2nd round running back to have a shot at a great one" crowd.

"We know that investing in better linemen with ability to run block (as well as pass block) and a play caller who knows when to call run plays (situations that are more likely to deliver success) and how to deploy personnel (to dictate box count) will see substantially more success than a strong individual RB with poor run blocking and inefficient play calling."
This article is silly because it sets inconsistent parameters. At some point it mentions the importance of the rule changes in 2010, but knocks the Cardinals and other teams for drafting a 1st round RB before those changes. It holds YPC as the greatest measure of success, but if we really go back, what are the qualifiers around those YPCs? Like, he says 15 if 20 backs didn't lead their team in YPC as the primary ball carrier, but are we going to pretend that the one game Devontae Booker had where he started and played well invalidates the 273 carries and Pro Bowl nod Josh Jacobs got in 15 other games? Is not being the "YPC Leader" while still being the primary back one year out of your entire rookie deal enough to say it's bad to draft a 1st round rookie?

There's so many missing factors here.

Also, for what it's worth, I don't think there's a single poster here advocating that RBs can't be good outside of the 1st or 2nd round. In my particular case, we don't have mid-round picks and we have 8 or so likely-to-take-RB picks between our 16th and 49th, so the point was only ever "take an RB at 16 or miss out on anyone of reasonable high end talent and value." It's basically 1st or 10th-at best, you pick.

I'd love for this article to be written up on players in the 5th round and beyond, because I'll guarantee you the numbers are much worse for 5th+ rounders.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,031
Reaction score
37,086
Location
UK
This article is silly because it sets inconsistent parameters. At some point it mentions the importance of the rule changes in 2010, but knocks the Cardinals and other teams for drafting a 1st round RB before those changes. It holds YPC as the greatest measure of success, but if we really go back, what are the qualifiers around those YPCs? Like, he says 15 if 20 backs didn't lead their team in YPC as the primary ball carrier, but are we going to pretend that the one game Devontae Booker had where he started and played well invalidates the 273 carries and Pro Bowl nod Josh Jacobs got in 15 other games? Is not being the "YPC Leader" while still being the primary back one year out of your entire rookie deal enough to say it's bad to draft a 1st round rookie?

There's so many missing factors here.

Also, for what it's worth, I don't think there's a single poster here advocating that RBs can't be good outside of the 1st or 2nd round. In my particular case, we don't have mid-round picks and we have 8 or so likely-to-take-RB picks between our 16th and 49th, so the point was only ever "take an RB at 16 or miss out on anyone of reasonable high end talent and value." It's basically 1st or 10th-at best, you pick.

I'd love for this article to be written up on players in the 5th round and beyond, because I'll guarantee you the numbers are much worse for 5th+ rounders.

I've never said the chances of getting a good RB are as high in the 5th.

My point has always been that high round running backs don't improve a teams chance of winning anywhere near as much as other positions. As the article proves in every way.

And its not just this article. I could show you several similar.

Better run blocking and play calling is far more important.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
37,879
Reaction score
20,472
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
I've never said the chances of getting a good RB are as high in the 5th.

My point has always been that high round running backs don't improve a teams chance of winning anywhere near as much as other positions. As the article proves in every way.

And its not just this article. I could show you several similar.

Better run blocking and play calling is far more important.

Although it doesn't mean running with no starting RBs improves a chance at winning. I still don't see a starting RB on our roster. Hence our dilemma, as we don't have the mid-round ammo we need to get a starting RB.
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,031
Reaction score
37,086
Location
UK
Although it doesn't mean running with no starting RBs improves a chance at winning. I still don't see a starting RB on our roster. Hence our dilemma, as we don't have the mid-round ammo we need to get a starting RB.

You don't. Most everyone else does.

There's literally a 3 year starter on the roster for a team that's made the playoffs 2 out of the last 4 seasons he was there.
 

PACardsFan

ASFN Addict
Joined
May 15, 2002
Posts
9,991
Reaction score
11,401
Location
York, PA
FWIW

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Now, wouldn't that be something. I see Waddle as the best receiver in this draft. Instead of trading up, I could also see them trading down a tad & drafting Harris before the Steelers snatch him up. We owe that to them for trading up & snatching Shazier & Dupree just before our picks.
 

Stout

Hold onto the ball, Murray!
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Posts
37,879
Reaction score
20,472
Location
Pittsburgh, PA--Enemy territory!
You don't. Most everyone else does.

There's literally a 3 year starter on the roster for a team that's made the playoffs 2 out of the last 4 seasons he was there.

That's great. I hope "most everyone else" is right, because that would mean we're playing well. I don't see Conner as some RB knight in shining armor. I don't see an Edmonds/Conner tandem as a starting time share as any kind of solution on a team that wants to make a serious run. Especially with KK at the helm. Fingers crossed that the spit and baling wire approach works out for us.
 
OP
OP
Ronin

Ronin

…..
Super Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Oct 12, 2006
Posts
132,111
Reaction score
52,136
Location
Las Cruces, New Mexico
Ian Rapoport
@RapSheet

·
13m


The #Giants are slated to pick No. 11 in the NFL Draft, and trading back is already something they are internally considering, I’m told. That spot will have real value. … How rare would a trade down be? GM Dave Gettleman has never traded down in the 1st round in 8 drafts as a GM
 

BritCard

ASFN Icon
Joined
Jan 10, 2020
Posts
21,031
Reaction score
37,086
Location
UK
That's great. I hope "most everyone else" is right, because that would mean we're playing well. I don't see Conner as some RB knight in shining armor. I don't see an Edmonds/Conner tandem as a starting time share as any kind of solution on a team that wants to make a serious run. Especially with KK at the helm. Fingers crossed that the spit and baling wire approach works out for us.

We already covered these points at length

1. You don't need a knight in shining armor
2. Many, many teams have made or won the SB with worse RB's. Including the 2008 Cardinals.
3. A good RB isn't the key to a good offense. A good offense is key to a good running back.
 

Dr. Jones

Has No Time For Love
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
24,795
Reaction score
13,532
This scares the absolute crap out of me....

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 

Krangodnzr

Captain of Team Murray
Joined
Jul 21, 2002
Posts
34,277
Reaction score
30,222
Location
Orange County, CA
We already covered these points at length

1. You don't need a knight in shining armor
2. Many, many teams have made or won the SB with worse RB's. Including the 2008 Cardinals.
3. A good RB isn't the key to a good offense. A good offense is key to a good running back.

Like I said earlier...this isn't 1984.

The Eagles won a Super Bowl with pretty much scrubs. Kyler Murray is the centerpiece of this offense. Surround him with good receivers and competent RBs and a good OL. The Cardinals need one more receiver.
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
534,792
Posts
5,246,343
Members
6,273
Latest member
sarahmoose
Top